Biotech and pharma develop a symbiotic relationship

This practice of using historical data is often no more than papering over a crack, because it produces less accurate results. Biotechs have more compounds that fail in phase III than pharmaceutical companies: pharma has a success rate of around 70 per cent, compared with 56 per cent for biotech. A failure at this stage hits any company hard, since the greater size and geographical scope of such later-stage trials means they cost more.

Ultimate merger

The distinction between biotech and big pharma may soon become less clear. "The two are really not that different. Ultimately, they have to sell to the same marketplace, which doesn't make a distinction between a biotech drug and a non-biotech drug," says Harold Glass, a lecturer on the pharmaceutical industry at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. At the moment, it is the science and tools they use that distinguish them most, says Glass.

However, the two industries are undergoing the agglomeration seen during the growth stages of any industry, says Powlett Smith. For example, in the IT industry in the 1980s, a raft of small entrepreneurial companies joined the big players such as IBM and Intel. Manufacturers realised they would have to make a choice about whether to go it alone or to share the same platforms and practices.

The pharmaceutical industry is at a similar juncture. Eventually, the spread of new technologies will mean any company that develops pharmaceuticals will use similar methods in drug discovery. By that time the marriage between biotech and big pharma will have matured, and the only thing the two will have left to learn is how to grow old together.

The empty lab

Imagine if a drug company could do all its research without employing any scientists. It would certainly take big pharma's R&D downsizing to an extreme, but it's not as absurd as it sounds. A US company called Innocentive (set up by US pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly) already taps into the knowledge of scientist "bounty hunters" across the world to solve research problems using much less in the way of resources.

It works a bit like eBay. On Innocentive's website, "seeker" companies and scientist problem-solvers interact in a marketplace. A company posts its problem, such as a method to separate DNA molecules, and a scientist offers an answer in exchange for a reward. Researchers can win over $100,000 for a single solution.

"It's a virtual laboratory, with hundreds of problems and thousands of scientists working on them at any one point," says Innocentive's Ali Hussein. And there are safeguards in place so no one loses out. "We serve as a third party enforcer of the agreements," says Hussein. Both parties can remain anonymous throughout if they so choose, and the researcher retains intellectual property rights until the last stage, when they hand them over in exchange for the reward. Over $1.5 million has been paid out to solvers in the past four years, says Hussein.

Innocentive may be a spin-off from Eli Lilly, but it has moved beyond drug discovery. Companies such as Dow Chemical, Dupont and Procter & Gamble now use the site, and the kinds of problems raised are often just as much about improving productivity as they are about molecular synthesis.

To date, over 90,000 scientists worldwide have registered on the site, with most based in China, closely followed by the US. "Our vision of the future is one giant group of scientists working on a challenge for a company without needing to be employed by them," says Hussein.

Emerging talent

Where will the new skills needed for the next wave of drug discovery and development come from? And where are the skills shortages?

The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry has surveyed its members and reckons it has the answers. The five skills that will be in growing demand in the coming years are:

IT AND MATHS

The sheer volume of chemical and biological data churned out in drug research is rising fast, so employers need life scientists with IT and computational skills capable of analysing and managing this information. One specialisation employers are crying out for is pharmacokinetics, the study of drug activity in the body. Job candidates will need strong maths, pharmacology and chemistry skills.

"OMICS"

Proteomics and metabonomics - in particular, metabonomics (the study of individual metabolic responses based on individual genomes) - could lead to more efficient drug discovery by allowing companies to predict drug efficacy and toxicity before clinical trials. The pool of candidates for these roles is small, but the quality demanded by employers is high. Proteomics, the study of proteins and their functions, is also expected to be a big draw.

MOLECULAR TOXICOLOGY

Scientists in this area need to combine a broad range of disciplines, from immunology to biotechnology. Predictive toxicology is likely to be increasingly important as pharmaceutical companies turn to computer models to test their drugs.

TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE

Researchers with experience of a clinical setting and of planning clinical trials are in short supply.

TECHNOLOGY KNOW-HOW

The growing complexity of scientific equipment used in R&D and drug manufacture will require more people skilled in operating and maintaining it.

Looking for a job in science or technology? Take a look at the latest opportunities on Newscientistjobs.com.

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.